Trump Management housing consent-decree compliance dispute
What happened
promisedocumented The consent decree committed Trump Management to specified fair-housing practices.
- Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, University of Michigan Law School: United States v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump, and Trump Management, Inc.Complaint, counterclaim, consent order, and compliance filings
actiondocumented The Justice Department communicated its position on the company's compliance and pursued further relief in the existing case.
- Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, University of Michigan Law School: United States v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump, and Trump Management, Inc.Complaint, counterclaim, consent order, and compliance filings
- U.S. Department of Justice via With Receipts: Letter regarding compliance with the Consent Order1978-01-20 · Assistant Attorney General letter to Roy Cohn
affected groupdocumented Prospective renters remained the protected group in the court-supervised compliance process.
- Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, University of Michigan Law School: United States v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump, and Trump Management, Inc.Complaint, counterclaim, consent order, and compliance filings
- U.S. Department of Justice via With Receipts: Letter regarding compliance with the Consent Order1978-01-20 · Assistant Attorney General letter to Roy Cohn
limitationdocumented The surviving record reflects an enforcement dispute and negotiated process rather than a new merits trial.
- Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, University of Michigan Law School: United States v. Fred C. Trump, Donald Trump, and Trump Management, Inc.Complaint, counterclaim, consent order, and compliance filings
- The Washington Post: Inside the government's racial bias case against Donald Trump's company, and how he fought it2016-01-23 · Case chronology, interviews, and contemporaneous records
People and organizations
- Prospective Trump Management rentersaffected party
- United States Department of Justiceaffected party
Assessment
A compliance dispute followed the settlement. On its own it establishes no new adjudicated discrimination violation.